Tests are indeed passing. with those changes
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Sean <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: > The changes look logical -- lots of these fixes are undoubtedly > correct. I'd vote for proceeding if unit tests pass. Should this cause > an issue, we'll catch and fix it. > > I'm also driven by the fact that this has been flagged for 0.3, and > I'm increasingly antsy about doing that without resolving it right > away. Commit or close it. > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Drew Farris <drew.far...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Sean <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Could we recklessly try taking it out and see what happens, unless > >> someone's sure it's not going to fly? > > > > I would say that making sure the unit tests work is a good start, but > > a fully comprehensive test would be to be sure that each of the > > classes with main methods work as well, including things that are > > intended to run via mav exec:java run on hadoop. The amount of effort > > involved in such a task goes without saying. > > >
